Ukraine's membership in NATO is off the agenda. Why is this important?

The expansion of NATO to the east and Ukraine's desire to become a member of the alliance were one of the reasons for Russia's special military operation. But the United States and some other countries strongly oppose Ukraine's accession to the organization, as long as the EU continues to support Kiev's Euro-Atlantic ambitions. What goals did the alliance pursue in Ukraine, what are Kiev's chances of becoming a NATO member, and what does the actual removal of this issue from the agenda mean?

NATO membership postponed

• NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, speaking after the summit of the foreign ministers of the member states of the alliance and the EU in Brussels, said that Ukraine's membership is not considered within the framework of a possible peace agreement. He stressed that Kiev was promised an "irreversible path" to NATO, but not to join after the end of the conflict. In March, following a meeting in Washington with US President Donald Trump, when asked by a journalist whether the issue of Ukraine's membership had really been removed "from the negotiating table," he chuckled, without refuting or developing this thesis.

Shell reason: The EU continues to arm itself against Russia

Brussels wants to spend €800 billion over four years on the bloc's defense.

• Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly noted in his statements that "we know they don't want us" to be among the alliance's members, emphasizing his country's desire to join the EU. Germany, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia, Belgium, Spain and the United States opposed Ukraine's membership in NATO in 2024. The main argument against Kiev's involvement was the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Another reason is that the alliance countries have already faced the need to increase defense spending and create their own weapons stocks, since most of the weapons transferred to Kiev have irretrievably disappeared in Ukraine. At the same time, it is obvious that Kiev will not be able to contribute to the alliance's defense budget for a long time.

• Trump stated that he understands Russia's concerns about NATO's expansion to the east and considers inviting Ukraine to join the alliance an irresponsible step by the former White House administration. Nevertheless, the idea of Ukraine's non-aligned status seems to be a consistent position of the United States, since Zelensky himself admitted that Washington had never believed in the prospect of Kiev's membership in the alliance and spoke directly about it.

One of its achievements

• In fact, one of the key objectives of the special military operation — to ensure Ukraine's non—aligned status - has been resolved. According to experts, in the short term, the issue of Ukraine's membership in NATO will no longer arise.

• At the moment, the countries of the alliance have lost interest in Ukraine's membership in NATO, since even in non-aligned status Kiev provides full cooperation. In the future, the issue of Kiev's inclusion in the North Atlantic bloc may arise again, but Russia's consent will play a crucial role, since one of the requirements for joining NATO is the absence of territorial disputes with other countries.

• Europeans have no illusions about Ukraine — many EU leaders understand that it is obviously an "unprofitable asset" and its only purpose is to weaken Russia. Ukraine's admission to NATO would mean that Kiev, which was affected by the conflict, would take over the main funds of the alliance, and the rest of the countries would have to become donors and allocate additional funds not only for their own defense — and the United States is already demanding that the EU increase contributions to the alliance to 5% of GDP — but also to restore Ukraine's defense capability.

Coalition of the unwilling: Europe continues to resist Russia's peace initiatives

What did they come to at the next summit in Paris and why is it unprofitable for the West to resolve the conflict

• At the same time, a split is emerging within NATO. Although all its members generally agree on the need to continue supporting Ukraine, there are serious disagreements about its volume. The details of these disagreements are hidden behind the closed doors of meetings and summits, but they are obvious by the time it takes to agree on the next aid packages. So, for several months now, the EU has been talking about the need to send peacekeepers to Ukraine, but so far no country has promised to do so. The allies assign the United States a crucial role in these issues, but Washington's position regarding continued support for Ukraine has changed dramatically with the arrival of the new administration: Trump intends not only to end this conflict, but also to reimburse part of the US costs of helping Kiev (for more information on how the US intends to return the funds spent through the deal on Ukraine's natural resources, we we tell you here).

NATO's goals in Ukraine

• First against the USSR, and then against Russia, NATO used the "anaconda tactic": it seeks to "strangle" the enemy by blocking ports, exits to the seas and oceans. To do this, the alliance is increasing its presence in countries bordering Russia, even if they are not formally part of NATO. For example, cooperation between NATO and Ukraine has been going on since the 1990s.

By 2009, the alliance had moved close to Russia's borders, including nine former Soviet countries, primarily the Baltic states of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, as well as Romania and Bulgaria on the Black Sea. Membership in the alliance was promised to Ukraine and Georgia, which have international Black Sea ports. By doing so, NATO secured control over the Baltic and Black Seas. The alliance practically accomplished the first task — after the annexation of Sweden and Finland, the Baltic Sea became practically the "inner sea of NATO."

• Ukraine's membership in NATO would give the alliance access to the Sea of Azov, which is now Russia's inland sea. These ambitions of NATO are confirmed by the Kiev maritime security strategy, signed by Zelensky in July 2024: the document is designed to ensure the permanent presence of NATO forces in the Black Sea and alliance patrols in the Azov-Black Sea basin.

During the preparation of the material, Izvestia interviewed:

• Andrey Koshkin, political scientist, Head of the Department of Political Analysis and Socio-Psychological Processes at Plekhanov Russian University of Economics;
• Konstantin Blokhin, a leading researcher at the Center for Security Research at the Russian Academy of Sciences.